Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
It's funny.  Laugh.

Journal smooth wombat's Journal: Does the Flying Spaghetti Monster exist? 6

It all started when supporters of Intelligent Design tried to claim a religious precept should be held on the same level as a scientific theory when it comes to Evolution. From that, the Flying Spaghetti Monster was born, somewhat in jest but also to raise the point: There's no more scientific basis for intelligent design than there is for the idea an omniscient creature made of pasta created the universe.

Now, the existence of FSM will be debated, along with other religions, in a panel discussion titled, "Evolutionary Controversy and a Side of Pasta: The Flying Spaghetti Monster and the Subversive Function of Religious Parody."

The panel will attempt to discuss religion in popular culture as well as answer several questions; What defines a religion? Does it require a genuine theological belief? Or simply a set of rituals and a community joining together as a way of signaling their cultural alliances to others?

For those in the area, the discussion will be held on Monday, November 19th in San Diego, California.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Does the Flying Spaghetti Monster exist?

Comments Filter:
  • All that tortellini didn't arise by random chance.



    Darn, I just remembered that I ate all the tortellini....

    • Oh come on! All that pasta didn't simply materialize out nowhere! You're being unrealistic!

      And this goes to show just how silly the whole idea is. I don't even think they really need this conference. If you think about, whether you believe some all powerful deity created everything or it built up over billions of years, either process seems pretty hard to wrap your brain around. Ultimately, neither view answers the real question: why?

      • I conjecture that at the most fundamental level, the questions of how and why are inseparable, and maybe even the same question.

        • The problem lies in that there is no beginning state. If religion is correct, and there was a deity responsible, where did the deity come from? If science is correct and there was a Big bang, where did the initial hyper-dense, zero-point source of the universe come from? "How" is a mechanistic question; "Why" tends to be motivational. I can tell you how a car works, but why there are cars is different question.

          • I'm glad you brought those two points up. Those are the exact same questions I always have in this discussion.

            If there is a deity (or deities), how did it/they come into existence? The same goes for all the matter in the universe. Where did it come from.

            The other question I always have, and which science cops out on, is what is the matter of the universe expanding into? The usual answer is it's a torus shape so there is no real edge.

            Sorry, homey don't play that. That's not an anwer. The entire univers
            • There may not be any meaningful space we're expanding "into." The universe isn't just IN spacetime it IS spacetime. That's not a dodge. Waht comes "before" is an interesting question, and there may be answer, but you have to have a pretty broad idea of "before."

              There are other models in which space is infinite, though. I don't like infinities, so I find this hard to swallow. Nature doesn't like exact zeroes, why so why should it honor infinities?

The moon is made of green cheese. -- John Heywood

Working...